Sony may get around potential backwards compatibility issues by implementing Gaikai's streaming technology.

Earlier this week, we mentioned that rumors are circulating about the next console generation's backwards compatibility, or more specifically, its lack thereof. This would be frustrating, but certainly understandable. True backwards compatibility for the PlayStation 4 would require Sony to integrate PlayStation 3 hardware into the system, which can create design problems. Software compatibility is one alternative, but that is rarely 100% effective for all titles. So what can Sony do to maintain interest in PS3 games once the PS4 launches? According to the Wall Street Journal, the manufacturer will use technology from last summer's Gaikai purchase to implement PS3 streaming in its upcoming console.

Cloud-based gaming platforms like Gaikai pose an interesting possible solution to the backwards compatibility problem. The process allows players to stream gameplay in real-time through remote servers, placing the hardware requirement burden almost entirely on high-speed internet connections. According to the report, this technology wouldn't be ideal for PS4 games, but might effectively stream PS3 titles at a resolution of 720p. If it works, the technology could allow Sony to maintain interest in recent PS3 releases, and test the limits of cloud gaming on a grander scale. Even better, this may allow PS3 functionality to be extended to handheld units like the PlayStation Vita.

Assuming all of the above is true, there are still concerns that Sony would need to address. For example, can Gaikai's technology, previously exclusive for PC games, effectively stream console titles? More importantly, will gamers need to repurchase their PS3 games to replay them on the new system? If Sony's February 20th announcement turns out to be a PlayStation 4 reveal, we'll learn more about the system's cloud gaming potential at that time.

I'm with Vault Citizen: If the PS4 forces me to rebuy my games library, I'm definitely going to think twice about buying it (especially in the first couple years, when PS3 patches and games will still be coming out regularly).

Streaming does sound like the best solution that doesn't result in a massive block of a console, but I'm getting worried about how many games are requiring high-speed internet for things like this and authorization (looking at you, Ubisoft). It's not cheap here in Canada, especially on a student's budget, and I hope Sony and the rest of the big manufacturers and publishers recognize that they may be alienating parts of their market outside of Japan and the big US cities.

So they selling you games you may already own? Its great you have the back catalogue if you never bought a PS3, but if you had a PS3, then that means you re buying the games again. Why cant they just have a think where it checks your hard drive, and any game thats on it will be free. That would be good.

And for those of us who already own a mountain of physical PS3 games? I'd rather have actual backwards compatibility or none at all. The more I hear about this next generation of consoles, the less interested I am with owning one.

I also wonder whether or not we'll need to re-buy old PS3 games to play them again. And even if we don't, how will we be able to get them without paying? Because I can't think of a way to do so. Then again, that's why I'm not in the industry right now...

There's the logistical problem of high-speed connections being too expensive, which is kinda why Onlive and Gaikai didn't really take off. Like it or not cable companies are getting too much profit to change that right now, so I doubt this will work very well. Now downloadable games? That would clear that hurdle, but a massive hard drive would still be needed. Luckily those are getting cheaper and bigger as time goes on, so that could work. A 1TB hard drive would be fantastic for such a thing.

Mr. Omega:I also wonder whether or not we'll need to re-buy old PS3 games to play them again. And even if we don't, how will we be able to get them without paying? Because I can't think of a way to do so. Then again, that's why I'm not in the industry right now...

If they wanted? Very easy:

- Insert the old physical copy of your PS3 into your PS4.

- Have the console read the disk and identify the game.

- Give you access to said game Stream.

With that, selling digital copies at a discount and maybe charging a small montly fee for the backward compatibility service (to pay for the bandwith and stuff, probably along the lines of 4.99 with adds or 9.99 without adds) you end up with a great service that will lure many hardcore PS gamers.

My guess? If sony implements this they will just force you to rebuy them.

an annoyed writer:There's the logistical problem of high-speed connections being too expensive, which is kinda why Onlive and Gaikai didn't really take off.

One would think so, but then again twitch is getting bigger and fatter streaming at 700+ and living almost fully of adds in a world with addblock, and what is proposed in the OP is barely more demanding in bandwith. TBH i just think companies like Onlive or OWN3D just failed at the buisness side, not in the concept itself.

Makes sense with them owning Gaikai now and all. However, if they plan on charging for that and making people re-buy their games then I call BS. Thankfully, I don't plan on ditching my PS3 anytime soon if this turns out to be true.

All in all, congrats Sony. You've now made me very curious to know what the hell you have up your sleeve.

You know what would be crazy? if they let you stream any ps3 game free, it would get a massive amount of people to buy the ps4 on launch creating a consumer base for ps4 titles. I realize this is about as likely as me getting super powers in the next 30 secs but still I can dream

Once again Sony succeed in making gamers buy their games again...again. If this is true of course. I actually wouldn't mind paying to stream games from previous generations provided they offer the following:

- Games from PS1, PS2 AND the PS3- Subscribing for unlimited access to all generations for a given time (so maybe £5 a month for PS1 and PS2, a bit more for PS3 or a combo of the two)- The option to outright buy a game but for less than it would cost to get a physical copy. Not £10 for a PS1 game from more than a decade ago or something mad like that.- No adverts, no monetisation beyond a subscription, just a flat fee to play games.- Some freebies for good will

Although really I would probably just stick with using a PS2, which I already have in a cupboard somewhere, and buying old games at carboot sales, charity shops and eBay for a few quid each. Likewise with a PS3. And as others have said the coming console generation is looking pretty grim.

How about ps1 and ps2 games? Yeah I'm going to be sticking with my ps3. Also I don't trust my internet provider giving a constant high-speed connection service on which I could rely on streaming (especially 720p), my internet has enough problems with 480 on youtube.

thesilentman:Right, so I paid for all those hard copies for nothing. Way to think smartly, Sony. I don't see this working out at all for you guys. Try harder.

You still have your PS3 right? So, what stops you from using it when you feel like playing a PS3 game? I honestly have no clue as to WHY this is an issue. Was never an issue back in the NES/SNES/N64 era, so why now? Besides, backwards computability makes things more expensive so, by not having it, the system is cheaper, isn't that what people want?

thesilentman:Right, so I paid for all those hard copies for nothing. Way to think smartly, Sony. I don't see this working out at all for you guys. Try harder.

You still have your PS3 right? So, what stops you from using it when you feel like playing a PS3 game? I honestly have no clue as to WHY this is an issue. Was never an issue back in the NES/SNES/N64 era, so why now? Besides, backwards computability makes things more expensive so, by not having it, the system is cheaper, isn't that what people want?

I'm knocking at the stupidity of game streaming in this instance. I've used Gaikai, but I don't think I can use that over my hard copies. And if Sony screws us over, an uproar ensues.

thesilentman:Right, so I paid for all those hard copies for nothing. Way to think smartly, Sony. I don't see this working out at all for you guys. Try harder.

You still have your PS3 right? So, what stops you from using it when you feel like playing a PS3 game? I honestly have no clue as to WHY this is an issue. Was never an issue back in the NES/SNES/N64 era, so why now? Besides, backwards computability makes things more expensive so, by not having it, the system is cheaper, isn't that what people want?

You'd think so. But that sounds too logical. Also there's two sides, one who wants a cheaper console and one who wants backwards compatibility. Then there's people that demand both. These people are also known to want to have their cake and eat it too.

thesilentman:Right, so I paid for all those hard copies for nothing. Way to think smartly, Sony. I don't see this working out at all for you guys. Try harder.

You still have your PS3 right? So, what stops you from using it when you feel like playing a PS3 game? I honestly have no clue as to WHY this is an issue. Was never an issue back in the NES/SNES/N64 era, so why now? Besides, backwards computability makes things more expensive so, by not having it, the system is cheaper, isn't that what people want?

I'd rather pay more and have backwards compatibility than have to find a place to hook up yet another console or have to hooking and unhooking them whenever I want to play something on an old machine.

With that, selling digital copies at a discount and maybe charging a small montly fee for the backward compatibility service (to pay for the bandwith and stuff, probably along the lines of 4.99 with adds or 9.99 without adds) you end up with a great service that will lure many hardcore PS gamers.

Nope, they won't do that. One of two things would happen: it will be abused by people renting games or trading them with friends if it's free, or for even a small fee, those of us with legit collections will be pissed off and not buy anything.

Not that it matters because streaming is garbage anyway. I'll be keeping my PS3 so I can play my games without lag and without bandwidth charges to worry about.

Cid SilverWing:Single-handedly the most retarded "solution" for backwards compatibility ever.

This is Always-Online DRM all over again. Fucking stop it already.

how else are you going to stream games without a internet connection??

You aren't going to stream games at all because streaming games isn't worth the time or money. Cid is spot on, it's just always online DRM and all of its problems all over again, except this time, where always online DRM only ruined your single player experience if the internet connection went out or the servers went down, streaming a game ruins your single player experience 100% of the time due to input delay caused by lag. Why the hell does anyone even pretend to think this technology is useful or a good idea? It's garbage. It's the worst thing introduced to gaming in a long time. So many negative things to say about it and not a single positive aspect about it to help balance out all the negatives. It's useless and the sooner everyone gives up on it, the better.

I have no idea how much putting a ps3 chip in the ps4 would cost, but i imagine it would be very expensive. Isn't sony using a coding system that's not a nightmare for developers to design this time? I imagine adding hardware that lets you play ps3 games will be very expensive. I already have a PS3, and i don't think the extra 1/4 of a cubic foot of space is worth 100 dollars. Hopefully Sony learned their lesson about console pricing so i highly doubt it would be added.

You know what would be nice though? An optional attachment that would add PS3 compatability. Just a small box you can buy and plug into a port on the side or something.

Anyway, this is just a rumor that comes from pretty much nowhere. I wouldn't trust it at all. I'll wait for the official announcement.

Tank207:And for those of us who already own a mountain of physical PS3 games? I'd rather have actual backwards compatibility or none at all. The more I hear about this next generation of consoles, the less interested I am with owning one.

doesn't game streaming chug like 2 gigs an hour? whatever I'm just nitpicking the one complaint about every new console is that there isn't enough games so they pretty much had to do something like this

heroicbob:doesn't game streaming chug like 2 gigs an hour? whatever I'm just nitpicking the one complaint about every new console is that there isn't enough games so they pretty much had to do something like this

am i the odd one out for keeping my old consoles?

No, because I plan on keeping my PS3 until it dies a honorably while letting me play a game.

I know that some people don't have the space to have that right next to their new console or anywhere, but I don't plan on throwing it away since I paid good money for it and it still works.

heroicbob:doesn't game streaming chug like 2 gigs an hour? whatever I'm just nitpicking the one complaint about every new console is that there isn't enough games so they pretty much had to do something like this

am i the odd one out for keeping my old consoles?

No you are not. Still have my PS2 and Xbox. Because my PS3 and 360 can't play the games I have on 'em. Or in the 360's case, the games I have aren't on the list of supported games. Because Microsoft stopped doing that.

kiri2tsubasa: Was never an issue back in the NES/SNES/N64 era, so why now? Besides, backwards computability makes things more expensive so, by not having it, the system is cheaper, isn't that what people want?

I think the issue came about around the Gameboy Advanced era, when you could plug your old gameboy games into a GBA and play them and people got used to such a thing, as well as being able to play PC games from decades ago today, and people get annoyed when the new consoles cant measure up to what other things did nearly a decade ago.